sophie_talks

joined 1 month ago
 

I've been thinking a lot about a long-term game development goal of mine.

My dream project would be a realistic first-person multiplayer game that combines elements I love from different genres. I'm a big fan of survival games, extraction shooters, and tactical team-based games, so I've been wondering whether it's possible to build something that evolves over time rather than trying to do everything at once.

My idea would be to start with an extraction-shooter foundation and focus on making that experience solid first. Then, if the project grows and I can build a larger team and secure more funding, I'd expand it with additional modes such as a tactical 5v5 experience and eventually a persistent open-world survival mode.

What I'm unsure about is whether this approach is technically realistic. Would building multiple game modes around the same project create too much technical debt over time? Could very different gameplay loops end up making development significantly harder?

I'm also curious about the player side of things. If a game offers several distinct modes, does that risk splitting the community too much and creating matchmaking or population issues, especially for a smaller or growing player base?

I'm still fairly new to game development and currently planning to work in Unreal Engine using Blueprints, so I'd really appreciate hearing from anyone with experience in multiplayer games, live-service projects, or large-scale game development.

Thanks in advance for any advice!

[–] sophie_talks@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

I think part of the issue is that there are simply so many games competing for attention now. Even good trailers can blend together after a while.

What usually gets me interested isn't the trailer itself....it's when I can quickly understand the game's core idea and what makes it different from everything else being shown.

[–] sophie_talks@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] sophie_talks@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

Gym equipment: 50kg resistance.

Holding hands: 500kg emotional resistance.

[–] sophie_talks@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

It feels like expectations keep stacking up. Every new release is expected to be bigger, longer, and packed with more features than the last, which probably makes it harder for teams to stay focused on what made the original idea interesting in the first place.

[–] sophie_talks@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

I think the biggest thing Reddit had was critical mass. Even if you hated the platform, there was always a community for whatever niche interest you had. Lemmy feels healthier in some ways, but it's still missing that depth. The upside is I spend less time doom-scrolling now, which is probably a net positive.

[–] sophie_talks@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago

It's hard to feel bad for a company worth billions

[–] sophie_talks@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I don't think graphics are the issue on their own. The problem starts when better graphics become the priority instead of making a better game. Some of the games I remember most weren't technically impressive, but they had great gameplay, a unique style, and felt like they were made with a clear purpose.

A lot of AAA games seem to keep getting bigger, yet not necessarily more enjoyable. Huge maps, endless side activities, and dozens of hours of content don't add much if the core experience feels repetitive. I'd happily take a well-crafted 20-hour game over a bloated 100-hour one any day.

[–] sophie_talks@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

Half these "sold out" stories don't tell you if it was 500 units or 50. Supply was already a mess before the price hike ... AI ate the RAM market and now everything downstream pays for it. The device is great, the timing is just bad.

 

Coming from the business side of gaming - this Valve Linux VRAM fix story is genuinely interesting to me, but not for the technical reason. A Valve engineer quietly drops a kernel patch, and suddenly a 4GB GPU that was practically unusable in modern games goes from 14 to 41 FPS in Alan Wake II. No press release. No marketing. Just a fix that triples performance for budget GPU users. From a growth perspective, that's a massive retained audience - people who were about to give up on PC gaming because their hardware couldn't keep up. Question for the devs here: how much do you think about low-VRAM users when optimizing your games? Is it even feasible at an indie level, or is that something only studios with Valve-level resources can realistically address?

[–] sophie_talks@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Honestly? Escape from Tarkov.

I understand what it's going for on paper. The tension, the risk, the realism. But every time I watch someone play it looks like 45 minutes of cautious walking followed by dying to someone they never saw in a direction they couldn't predict.

Maybe I'm just not built for it.

[–] sophie_talks@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Dredge if you haven't touched it yet ... fishing but deeply unsettling in the best way. Short, cheap, stays with you.

Tunic if you want something that genuinely respects your intelligence. Feels like Zelda until it doesn't.

And if you're okay with losing sleep, Noita. Just go in blind.

[–] sophie_talks@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

Warhorse buying and restoring the actual castle from KCD is the most on-brand thing a studio has ever done. That's a team that genuinely gives a shit about what they're making. The Middle-earth RPG being described as a "living world" is doing a lot of heavy lifting though ... every studio says that. But if anyone can actually deliver it after KCD2, it's probably them. And yeah, Bethesda announcing Skyrim again in 3, 2, 1...

view more: next β€Ί